Civilization and logic: more than a fortunate accident

I’ve mentioned many times that the disappearance of logic as a primary subject in US schools has accompanied a long, gradual erosion of individual freedom and independence.

There is specific link: It leads to Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence.

THIS IS OF ENORMOUS IMPORTANCE.

Several years ago, I came across a letter to the editor of Commentary Magazine. The letter was published in the January 1979 issue. It came from a Jefferson scholar, Wilbur Samuel Howell.

Howell makes several key points. As a college student, Jefferson studied philosophy and logic under Professor William Small, at William and Mary. Small had come to the college from Aberdeen, Scotland, where he had studied under William Duncan, a renowned logician and author of Elements of Logick. Indeed, Jefferson later remarked Professor Small went a long way toward shaping his life.

Therefore, it’s no surprise that the Declaration of Independence would adhere to a logical structure. Indeed, the Declaration is a kind of argument from first premises, through to a conclusion.

Note: Another Founder, James Madison, thought of by many as the father of the Constitution, studied logic intensely at the College of New Jersey. In fact, we have 122 pages of Madison’s own handwritten notes from the course. The course followed the pattern laid down in a famous 17th-century book, Logic or the Art of Thinking.

I went back and read the Declaration of Independence, and I’ll open up its logical structure.

It begins with this:

“When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

Jefferson, in this prologue, indicates that the people should state their reasons for separating from a ruling power. Before he goes on to do that, he enunciates his first premises.

All men have rights, and to secure them, they create governments.

Second, the people have the authority to abolish any ruler that tries to destroy those rights, and, in its place, the people should institute a new government.

Third, when a long history of tyrannical abuse proves that the old government cannot be corrected, the people have a duty to overthrow it.

Here is the text:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. –Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.”

What remains is for Jefferson to list the abuses of the British Crown; to prove, in other words, that the king has, in fact, brought on such a stream of tyrannical actions.

Well, here they are:

“He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

“He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

“He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

“He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

“He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

“He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

“He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

“He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

“He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.”

Jefferson goes on to list many more abuses.

He then announces his conclusion, based on the original premises of his argument and the examples he has cited to confirm that the heart of these premises is true:

“We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

“We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.”

Fire, passion, even poetry, held within the flow of a logical progression.

I point this out to show that the Founders were not only acquainted with the use of logic, they wanted to make their great case for freedom and independence by using its power.

In their minds, freedom and logic were connected.

If in our schools, in 2016, logic as a distinct subject has been reduced to paltry terms, how are students able to grasp the majestic nature of freedom, as expressed in the Declaration?

How are they able to understand that living in freedom means more than vaguely drifting from one slogan to another, one addled piece of political rhetoric to another?

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

21 comments on “Civilization and logic: more than a fortunate accident”

A particularly brilliant column, Jon, also poetic. Thanks so much. Regardless of whether we the ‘independent individualists’ reacquire the republic for ourselves and others, the true teachers will reign supreme… the need for cognitive remediation countrywide and worldwide is enormous.

Right ON, again, Jon! And my mind jumps immediately to the fact that since 1986 when I first partook of LSD, I have set forth in my own life on the same premises and conclusions in regard to my individual relationship vs. the USA…and though I have not composed such a declaration of independence for individual interpretation and use against the state, these principles of universal logic are equally valid at the individual level, i.e., in regard to making the personal choice of divorcing or divesting oneself from institutional abuse and oppression. I would like to see composed by you such a declarative statement for individual application against all forms of tyranny, abuse, deceit, oppression, control, theft, etc.

Somewhat related. Earlier this month, an alternate view was given by Thomas Mountain regarding the war for independence by the British colonies in North America. He also argues that the Constitution was plagiarized, almost without change, from the League of the Iroquois.

The article you linked, especially coming from a socialist perspective as it was, was pretty far off the mark. It is hardly related to Logic, in a bad way.

It tries to argue that the only thing really driving American independence was being pro-slavery. It equals democracy with slavery, but it advocates socialism. It makes a slight out of the Iroquois having a democratic system first, as if it was good for them, but bad when Americans did it (then it was suddenly slavery), also acting as if democratic forms of government weren’t long ago invented in the Mediterranean as well or that using a prior form of government is theft in some way (is this the cultural appropriation we hear so much about?).

It neither mentions or seems to recognize any rights or principles. Democracy is not the greatest thing in the world, it’s often not respecting the individual’s choice and dignity, but socialism rejects them categorically. Slavery is anti-free market, it is very unproductive, yet I believe this author would link them if asked. A very small percentage of people owned slaves in the Colonial and later periods. It would be like going around today treating everyone like they must represent the Corporate Tech Giants because they live in America.

In its main subject area, it treats African countries as if they are run from Washington, D.C., and have no responsibility, conscience, or power. It’s the West’s fault that they have democracy, that they keep it, and also that when elections are held it leads to genocide and tribal conflict. I don’t know why they wouldn’t see that they could alter their own governments to avoid cultural issues like tribal violence, or implement socialism as a lot of democracies have done, if that is a better idea.

I would suggest before jumping into a Big Glob of socialist Love, it is more important to make sure our senses of Logic, Individuality, Creativity, Productivity, and Awareness are finely tuned. The best plans for our own lives are not written by people who have never met us, and those plans only become our reality if we fail to make our own plans and act on them.

Read James Perloff on this document. It’s a glorious one with murky provenance. It’s in Paine’s style, not Jefferson’s. The problem was selling it to the public. Paine’s secularism was unpalatable.

Jefferson shared it somewhat, but quietly. He was an Illuminist, per ex-Illuminist Doc Marquis and Jefferson’s own letters on initiation into the mysteries. Jefferson wasn’t evil. He was a curious man, a quasi-secular gnostic who re-wrote the Bible, a sucker for ancient secrets, so becoming a useful dupe in the Illuminati’s “New Atlantis” plot. Its leaders may have prompted his un-Constitutional Louisiana Purchase against his own conscience, which his writings show bothered him greatly.

He calls the meetings in faraway, inconvenient, uncomfortable places “for the purpose of fatiguing them into compliance.” That’s interesting to me and kind of amusing. It’s very true today. If you want to spend thousands of dollars on plane tickets you can fly over to the location of the World Bank or the IMF and complain to them about their policies. Otherwise, just put up with it. I don’t know of any other way to give feedback to those agencies about the fact that we dislike what they do.

Logic is only part of the toolkit. Inadequate of its own, without the capacities/comparatives&contexts earned by research&experience, accompanied by the developing skills of discernment/dot-connecting&wisdom, as well a relentless&willful heart.

Whether jefferson was a freemason or not is debatable, but certainly those around him were, including some of his own family. Beyond that, it is waay past due to challenge the myth of the american founding patriarchy&demockracy, as well what these white/european privileged/male slave owners were pedaling — no-more/no-less than a furthering iteration of snake-oil — “the grand chessboard”, with global populations&resources (the natural world) as fools/tools&pawns.

Little has changed in thousands of years — it’s still about slaves&slave-masters. America was a lie, founded on genocide/slavery&trickery. How the hell do you start a genuine/break-away liberation&democratic movement… with the genocide of one race and the enslavement of another?…. and the subsequent constancy of wars&exploitation around the globe, as well on its own populations? Stunning, what the creeps marketed then, and what the creeps are still selling. MADison avenue — as carlin would quip — it’s a club, and you ain’t in it.

Obviously the constitution was dead on arrival from the gitgo… along with millions of indigenous, and millions of africans…. and that was just the beginning. The joke was on america — nothing was delivered, everything was taken — just like the treaties with the earlier inhabitants.

Every campaign&election, i’m reminded of lucy&charlie brown and the football. Not much has changed over millennia — bread&circuses, the endless punch&judy show, and an infinity of promises for a “better” tomorrow. Aka the matrix broadcasting system (MBS) (and i do mean bullshit).

Divide&conquer, with weapons& bs by the trainload — same as it ever was. Now signing up for the new-new transhumans. If you loved ’em before, this one’ll knock yer mind right out of yer socks.

The problem is: Logic does not necessarily get us to Wisdom! Logic is essential for building an analytical, lawyerly case (let’s not forget that Jefferson also studied Law, was a lawyer for a while, though he never really liked that job!). TJ builds too many castles in the air, and then tries to live in them. “All men are created equal.” Really? Perhaps he means that they are equal in their aspirations for “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Of course, neither Jefferson nor any of the other “Founding Fathers” ever bothered to define “happiness.” Is the “happiness” of the slave-holder the “happiness” of the slave? With 150 slaves keeping TJ in the high life at Monticello, one wonders how much thought TJ gave to that issue!

Further: about those various “abuses” cited against the Brits. I strongly doubt that many people ever bother to read them or think about them. There is that very troublesome word, “savages,” for example. TJ accuses the Brits of encouraging the “savages” to attack American “settlers”–i.e., colonists. Of course, there’s no mention of the fact that the colonists have been attacking the Indians (“savages”) and encroaching on their land since our crazy pilgrim fathers (perhaps our real “founding fathers”?) first landed on Plymouth Rock. (Was it Stokely Carmichael or Malcolm X who used to say: “My ancestors didn’t land on Plymouth Rock! Plymouth Rock landed on me!)

I’m all for Logic, but why wait to study it in college? We can start with basic principles in the first grade! Just put it in the language kids will understand! Keep returning to those principles throughout one’s academic career.

But, we also need the right Information! (Orwell said, “Whoever controls the information controls the imagination.) We need to imagine as much as we need to analyze. In America, we get a glut of information–and most of it is misinformation or disinformation. We perceive “as through a glass, darkly.” We need to clean our lenses and train the laser beams of Logic on the cobwebs of confusion!

You had me upon till “happiness” then your argument fell apart. Happiness is, a subjective term. Very difficult to define.

Firstly, Logic followed to its means and end, bears the fruit we call wisdom.

Jefferson was a product of his time, as you are yours; albeit he dared to dream of a nation greater than the colonies. Greater than what he had witnessed, than what he knew. He was a man who convicted to his principles and understood which battles to fight, and which to leave for later. In his aim to free slaves he indebted himself to such a point, that, his slaves were sold after his death to pay the debts of Monticello. He freed a number of his own slaves in his lifetime, those he knew could take care of themselves. And Monticello provides the daily needs and shelter of all who worked there, to free them outright would be to cause their destruction in those times. And bring contempt from those he wished to bring to his ideas. He even devised a plan for the government to purchase slaves as children and raise them as freemen, in order to end slavery in America. The declaration of independence is in reference to ‘ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL’, and he meant that precisely. Jefferson was greatly troubled by the plight of the slave. You have remember he inherited Monticello at 21, a fully functioning plantation. To free all his slaves would have been to bring ruin on all involved.

Tell me, do you pity the slaves yourself, and try to free them, those that work in china and other slave places, when you enter Wal-Mart or some such for your daily needs; gadgets and widgets, bobbles and bangles; or the fellow who pumps your gas, or the fast food third-worlders or darkly figure who fetches your viddles at lunch.

First define slavery.

‘Savages’, and what would ‘you’ call those Mohawk/Seneca/Cherokee/Ojibwa/Sioux mercenaries who were hired to divide and separate the settlers. Whom far from their normal occupancy; the Ojibwa, Mohawk and Sioux were slavers and warmoungerers to the extreme. And they were hired because they could precisely do the worst. Which was to bring hell down on the settlers heads. These ‘Savages’ were very good at their work, and would have done it otherwise. In fact in a lot of cases the British would rein back an eager persecuter.

And in the case of ‘their’ land, evidence/ fact and artefacts; those that are not confiscated and reburied. Shows that those who followed the land bridge were not the first here, but usurped lands from others, the Solutrean and the Magdalenians. And the more caucasian tribal immigrants who arrived from the Atlantic side, tens of thousands of years before Clovis. I sympathize in the aboringinal plight. But strangely modern native culture suppresses that knowledge and artefact from Pre-Clovis. Why do you think that is?… could it be that their white. And that would undermine, ‘first people status.

Now there is, greater mention of African slaves, granted their plight was terrible. You neither mention the Native, Irish, Chinese (whom I must say were less than all other slaves, lesser than dog in the eyes of most whites), half breeds, prisoners, pow’s, mulatto (There is a great number of mullatos in african slave numbers; are they black or are they white.) from England and Europe and various others that were enslaved and indentured in North America. The Irish slave alone out-numbered the black slave two to one…do the research. Please prove me wrong.

“But, we also need the right Information! (Orwell said, “Whoever controls the information controls the imagination.) ” -Gary Corseri

……….I partially agree in this statement, maybe you could listen to your own argument.

In the end, you will find that Jefferson was great man. And your argument, because of context and a great period of time and propaganda, is flawed and only ad hominem, driven by the many faulted ideals of modern social justice.

Of course, I never made an argument about the meaning of “happiness”! I merely pointed out that neither had Jefferson, though he cites it as one of the 3 pillars of human existence.

It may be a “subjective” question, but it’s quite important. Socrates walked around Athens asking people about the meaning of happiness, justice, truth. Asking those kinds of questions can get a man sentenced to a bout of hemlock-drinking!

There are several points I could argue here, but let me tackle just a couple: TJ did not free his slaves upon his death. (Actually, Washington did, or at least he provided in his will that his slaves should be set free upon the death of his wife, Martha. This might have made for some uneasy nights for Martha after George had met his Maker!) TJ, like so many of the Southern elite, passed on his wealth of slaves to his “posterity”–his daughter.

I don’t think I have to define “slavery.” As one of the Supreme Court Justices once declared about porn: “I know it when I see it!”

BTW, I don’t shop at Wal-marts, and nobody has “pumped” my gas for decades. Do you really live in the USA? I try not to exploit others, and I try not to be exploited. That sounds simple, but it’s not.

As for “warmongers” among the Indians–there were probably some; one finds evil and treachery everywhere, among all people. As for “white” people who were here long before the “red” people crossed the Siberian land bridge–I need to see a lot more evidence. As for the exploited Irish, no doubt; I do believe most of that came later–after the potato famine sent the Irish packing. (Another myth we might wish to examine at some length is the one about the Civil War being fought to free the Black man. If that was a popular cause, why were there draft riots in NYC, mostly led by recent Irish immigrants, when scores of free blacks were hanged and murdered in the streets? But…, these are very different issues, are they not?)

Jefferson impregnated his child-slave, Sally Hemming, when she was 17. One of his nefarious acts as president was to sign the “Indian Removal Act” (which Jackson enforced, resulting in the “Trail of Tears” and over 7,000 dead Indians along that wintry trail). If we are ever to have real “independence” in this world, we shall have to get beyond our cherished myths about our “great men” and our “high principles.”

Gary, your perspectives on things would go down better if you were a little more accurate in your ‘facts’. The fact is that it has never been proven that T.J. “lmpregnated his child-slave” Sally. Possibly his son, or another relative.

Read ‘The Jefferson Lies’ by David Barton, and then make your accusations.

“Facts” are mutable, aren’t they? Jefferson used to be a hero of mine. Then I read different biographies about him during the past couple of decades. One eye-opener was “The Dark Side of Thomas Jefferson.” I forget the author.

In “fact,” for the past couple of weeks, amid a lot of busy-work, I’ve been reading Fawn M. Brodie’s 811-page book (with index and footnotes), “Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate Biography.” I think the book is fairly balanced–good & bad about TJ: a strong intellect, fine writer, etc. But, a fair bit of negatives, too. On page 293, one reads:

“Sally Hemings’ third son, Madison, born at Monticello in 1805, wrote explicitly of the beginnings of his mother’s relationship with Jefferson:

“‘Their stay (my mother’s and Maria’s) was about 18 months…. During that time my mother became Mr. Jefferson’s concubine, and when he was called home she was ‘enciente’ by him…. Soon after their arrival, she gave birth to a child, of whom Thomas Jefferson was the father.”

Brodie continues: “Actually Sally Hemings was in Paris not 18 but almost 26 months…. [She] was between 14 and 15 when she arrived, and between 16 and 17 when she returned to Virginia.”

Brodie wrote her book in 1974, and it is considered one of the “definitive” biographies about Jefferson. She tries to put a positive spin on TJ’s relationship with Sally:

“For any slave child at Monticello Jefferson was a kind of deity. Since her own father John Wayles had died in the year of her birth, Jefferson was perhaps as close to being a parental figure as anyone she had ever known.”

Frankly, I don’t think Brodie succeeds with her “positive spin,” and she may have besmirched TJ even more. John Wayles, btw, was Jefferson’s friend and neighbor. In addition to the usual bit of slave-holder’s miscegenation, Wayles fathered Jefferson’s wife, Martha (who died after childbirth in the 10th year of their marriage). Wayles was very rich and Martha inherited most of his money, and the already wealthy TJ became one of the wealthiest (and most influential) men in Virginia when he married Martha. (Despite all that money, which never seems to be enough for some people (!), TJ and Martha appear to have been “happy” with each other!).

I will no longer continue this thread. My work is widely available at fine sites on the Web. In “fact,” I don’t think I’ve ever written at such length about TJ. I’m just a guy who raises questions about “official narratives”–the kind of myths and memes that shapes our lives. Jon Rappoport is an excellent writer and I thank him for the questions he raises and the space he makes available for discussion.

Your case is based on 800 pages and knee-jerking and other what-not modern interpretations of the past. One can easily understand the nature of man from documents of that time period…if you look, as opposed to the meanderings of negro-centrics wishing to piss in the pool and propagandize modern thought. And fuel the extremists and shit-disturbers of BLM and such. I cite that you are one such individual. Are you?

In the words of Morgan Freeman, if we are going to stop racism and hate, which are fueled by your rhetoric we need to “Stop talking about it.” And get on the business of treating each other equally. And really changing the world to the better.

I don’t suppose if TJ knew the meaning of happiness either, simply his own happiness. And that I know he struggled with it, from the documents and letters of that time. What he was speaking to was the vitality of that in the making of a quality of a life. The three pillars, he knew were vital to that end.

“Actually, Washington did, or at least he provided in his will that his slaves…” GC

I stand corrected…

Splitting hairs are we, well, here’s a few facts my young friend:

Jefferson felt the black slave was like holding…

“a wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go.”

This was exactly what Jefferson felt about slavery. I express again that he inherited a plantation at ’21’. A difficult thing to deal with for such a young person, a dilemma of extreme proportions to say the least when all your life and those that you wish to free are fully supported by that which you hate. The negro could be neither let go, or kept safely. Even though he cared about the well-being of those slaves, and I might say took care of them on that plantation. They hated him because he was the ‘master’. TJ was institutionalized on his own plantation life.

Jefferson felt to truly free the slave, all involved had to agree to their freedom, all had to agree to abolition.

“In 1778, he drafted a Virginia law that prohibited the importation of enslaved Africans.”

Much to his distress, enacting this law did nothing, for slavery in Virginia became very profitable. And in fact increased substantially. And Virginia was exporting slaves.

“These views were radical in a world where unfree labor was the norm.”

“Jefferson also thought that slavery was contrary to the laws of nature, which decreed that everyone had a right to personal liberty.”

“hideous blot,…”

All these quotes, allow us into the soul of a conflicted man. A man determined with his great friend John Adams to change the world. To bring into existence the reality for happiness, individuality and true freedom for all. At the same time hideous forces both evil and masonic work towards his and John Adams, and independence’s down fall. Spies abound, even from outside the country in foreign lands.

“BTW, I don’t shop at Wal-marts, and nobody has “pumped” my gas for decades. Do you really live in the USA? I try not to exploit others, and I try not to be exploited. That sounds simple, but it’s not.” GC

You don’t eat food; you don’t buy clothing; you don’t eat vegetables picked by oppressed Mexican labor; you don’t drive a car, or purchase a thing in any store. Or play on a gadget made by tiny hands. Which are all brought to you on the back of slavery. Slaves that cost a few dollars a month. Ah but it is all subjective…hm.

I propose that you are one of the triggered by words such as nigger, or savage, or any of the dirty things you can dig up about the past, and throw in the face of those who seek real and substantial change. I question you, who is Peter Carr?

There are much better things to put you time to that tarnishing a freedom fighter. None of us are perfect, none of us are without a blemish. But when seen from its context, Tee Jay was a courageous man for his time.

Perhaps the moderns are more to be scrutinized by you and your great intellect. How about J D Rockefeller, or Ziggy B, or for that matter any of the top one tenth of one percent. Yah see the plantation is still here, despite the working of Tee Jay, and we are all part of that now. Better to fight the devil you know and change that world to the better, that fight ghosts in your heart. Tee Jay was on our side GC… really. Stop with the dirt, your much more intelligent than that. I can tell.

You wish to end the discussion… ok it’s ended. I’m Irish I need the last word…lol.

Jon – I loved your commentary on “LOGIC”. As a graduate of Wheeling Jesuit University [Wheeling, WVA] (1955 – 1959) – I HAD to have a double major – with one of the majors being Philosophy – which included a one year / 3 hours per week / class in Logic. You are right – the absence of logic in today’s discourse – whether political or social — is appalling and detrimental to our very survival. If you are ever in the San Diego area – I will pick up the tab for a meal and drinks.